Citation Nr: 1017073
Decision Date: 05/07/10 Archive Date: 05/19/10
DOCKET NO. 09-19 861 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin
THE ISSUE
The validity of the debt created by the removal of the
Veteran's spouse from his compensation award.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
A. Barone, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The Veteran had active service from November 1992 to January
1998.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a July 2008 determination of a
Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA). A notice of disagreement was received in August 2008,
a statement of the case was issued in February 2009, and a
substantive appeal was received in May 2009.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management
Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the
appellant if further action is required.
REMAND
The Veteran's May 2009 substantive appeal submission
indicated that the Veteran desired to testify at a hearing
before the Board. The Veteran was scheduled for a hearing in
March 2010 at the RO in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; he did not
report for this hearing. However, the Veteran submitted a
letter in March 2010 explaining that he had relocated from
his Wisconsin home and desired to have a new hearing
scheduled nearer to his new residence. The Veteran also
expressed that he made the same request in advance of the
scheduled hearing through a telephone call to the RO.
The Board found that good cause was shown, and in April 2010
the Board granted the Veteran's motion to reschedule the
hearing. The case must therefore be returned to the RO to
make arrangements for the requested hearing (and transferring
the case to a new RO, as appropriate). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107
(West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.703 (2009).
Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:
After action in accordance with the
Veteran's request to transfer his case to
an RO nearer to his new residence, the
appropriate RO should schedule the Veteran
for a Travel Board hearing (or a
videoconference hearing if the Veteran so
elects) in connection with his appeal.
After the hearing is conducted, or in the
event the Veteran withdraws his hearing
request or fails to report for a scheduled
hearing, the case should be returned to
the Board.
The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and
argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded.
Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law
requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of
Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims for additional development or other
appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2009).
_________________________________________________
ALAN S. PEEVY
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2009).